Some companies have strict rules: for example, cheerleaders in sports must remain in excellent physical condition, the characters at places such as Walt Disney World have very strict rules about what behavior is appropriate for them to demonstrate, some companies have dress codes or dietary restrictions, and so forth.

With that in mind, I wonder how anyone could willingly work for a company with such strict rules. What does everyone else say about this? Why would anyone willingly work for such a company?

People will take jobs at minimum because they need to eat and make rent. Then move up to wanting to be a functional part of a community with other workers. If they can get that, they'll aspire to something that makes them feel special. If the person is desperate enough for money, human interaction or fame or self-actualisation, they will take a job with certain downsides. The more opportunities a person gets to fill those needs, they more they will put up with and the more effort they will put in.

Somebody cleaning up sick off of a Disneyland floor might be doing so because it pays better than cleaning sick off the floor at McDonalds. And there aren't many jobs they're qualified for that are significantly better. Or its more convenient to work there because they're a student and Disney needs more staff on school holidays. Although if there are too many rules that annoy them personally, they might also quit and start acting less professionally whenever they can get away with it.

In the cheerleader's case, dietary restrictions are just one of the problems they have. Stalking and harassment as well as a massive chance of being injured (NFL cheerleaders are almost as likely to get a catastrophic injury as the players, and much more likely than basketball or baseball players). And through it all, they have to give a professionally mandated smile and positive attitude. That's because the advantages are huge. They can be cheered on by a huge crowd and feel like part of a huge community. Crowds of people will watch and be amazed by their athletics, beauty and charisma. Even if only the pervy weirdos actually learn their names.

The also-short answer is that mainstream organizational psychology pinpoints three major reasons why people stay at their jobs: affective commitment, continuous commitment, and normative commitment. Affective commitment means that an individual stays at their job because they agree with the organization's vision, etc. Continuous commitment means they stay because they don't have a choice, e.g, it would mean being jobless homeless. Lastly, normative commitment means that they stay because of some combination of social pressure and societal norms, i.e., staying at the job is what they "should" do.

The more complicated answer is that this is just one model for organizational commitment, and though it's the mainstream model, there might be more nuances. Also, which component is most important probably depends on time, place, and status. Millennials, for example, seem more interested in being part of organizations whose goals align with their own whereas previous generations have been content staying because they "ought" to be at that job. Previous generations, namely the silent generation, were also less upwardly mobile than later generations, including the baby boomers, so it's likely that they have higher continuous commitment. Additionally, each of these three probably varies by social class: working class people are probably more continuous-focused than affective-focused whereas upper class individuals can afford to be more affective-focused. A wealthy person (and coincidentally somebody with a broader social safety net) can more likely leave a job without worrying where their next meal is coming from versus somebody living paycheck to paycheck.

It likely varies by industry as well, though I haven't read much research on this. It's reasonable that certain career paths are more affective-oriented than others. You would go into teaching, for example, because you were passionate about teaching, i.e., high affective commitment, whereas less glamorous but high paying jobs like garbage disposal would have individuals with high continuous commitment. The same is true for union work. Union jobs tend to be cushier than non-union jobs, so an individual is more likely to stay solely for the money, even if the work is neither glamorous nor expected. Lastly, there are certainly jobs that people take because it's what they're expected to do: somebody joins the military because their father and grandfather were both in the military. Culture also factors into this one. I've also not read much literature on the topic, but it's reasonable that collectivist cultures are more normative-oriented than affective-oriented whereas individualist cultures, as the name suggests, are the reverse.

Probably the best answer I can give is: I don't know, and if you find an answer, pls tell me.

Money, the place is a business and has rules to serve a purpose. They pay you more because they expect higher degree of performance from you, they charge customers more because the customers are getting a high quality experience. Beyond that, some people actually like the work, I work front desk at a hotel so there is strict requirements on my behavior and mannerisms, but I enjoy it. The pay isn't great, but way better then being a shelve stocker or burger flipper.

Rules are everywhere. So...I'm not seeing thr complaint. All jobs have rules you must abide by unless you're self-employed, but even then the people you do business with will have rules/terms on how they associate with you.

I agree. You could also end up unemployed. There are a lot of 20+ year olds who are in this position and live off their parent's money.

Click to expand...

Yes. I believe that some people are very lazy maybe also. So, instead of getting a job and earning money (even at a strict company) they will claim government benefits or use their own parent's money even past the age of 20.

Yes. I believe that some people are very lazy maybe also. So, instead of getting a job and earning money (even at a strict company) they will claim government benefits or use their own parent's money even past the age of 20.

Click to expand...

Yeah if you're that age you should be working or at school. I remember back in college, there was this 22 year old student in charge of our study group and he was unemployed. Like bro, take care of your own life and get a job before you tell me what to do and go on your power trip.

Yeah if you're that age you should be working or at school. I remember back in college, there was this 22 year old student in charge of our study group and he was unemployed. Like bro, take care of your own life and get a job before you tell me what to do and go on your power trip.

I wouldn't know how it's like to work for a company that DOESN'T have strict rules. If ours would be a bit less strict, that'd be great.

Click to expand...

The company for which I am currently working (actually both of my jobs) does not have terribly strict rules, and it is great; I feel much more comfortable and relaxed and can work to the best of abilities because I do not need to worry about being disciplined for some minor infraction.

The company for which I am currently working (actually both of my jobs) does not have terribly strict rules, and it is great; I feel much more comfortable and relaxed and can work to the best of abilities because I do not need to worry about being disciplined for some minor infraction.

Click to expand...

There are many work environments where it would be preferable people are able to be held accountable for minor infractions. It ensures quality.

People will take jobs at minimum because they need to eat and make rent. Then move up to wanting to be a functional part of a community with other workers. If they can get that, they'll aspire to something that makes them feel special. If the person is desperate enough for money, human interaction or fame or self-actualisation, they will take a job with certain downsides. The more opportunities a person gets to fill those needs, they more they will put up with and the more effort they will put in.

Click to expand...

Know somebody that suffers grievously from crippling social anxiety/depression or is avoidant and has a chronic lack of friends? Convince them to get a part time retail job. I'm dead serious. It gets them out of their room gets them interacting with people regularly. (a little off topic I know, but I've seen it help and I'd like to spread the word).

There are many work environments where it would be preferable people are able to be held accountable for minor infractions. It ensures quality.

Click to expand...

How minor do you mean? If a manager punishes their underlings for something such as drinking the last container of milk in a communal refrigerator or expects them to be busy every second of the day, that is too excessive, in my mind.

Some companies have strict rules: for example, cheerleaders in sports must remain in excellent physical condition, the characters at places such as Walt Disney World have very strict rules about what behavior is appropriate for them to demonstrate, some companies have dress codes or dietary restrictions, and so forth.

With that in mind, I wonder how anyone could willingly work for a company with such strict rules. What does everyone else say about this? Why would anyone willingly work for such a company?

Click to expand...

As most people stated above usually for money. Sometimes companies with strict rules have to worry about accreditation and holding themselves to a higher standard than others. That's how it is in my place of employment. More than likely if you can work under really demanding conditions like those, you are much more marketable to other employers when it comes to to looking for jobs. That's my two cents though.